Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 06:44 UTC
Amiga & AROS Bill McEwen of Amiga, Inc. writes in a public letter: "Over the last several months and in fact couple of years, Amiga has continued our software and business development and generally kept quiet. This path of quietness was chosen so that we communicated only when there was a development that culminated in a product that could be purchased. In recent weeks, our being quiet has been interpreted as weakness or an open invitation to attempt harming our business relationships and opportunities with partners and customers."
Order by: Score:
Let me sum up that "communication" in C
by kad77 on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 07:13 UTC
kad77
Member since:
2007-03-20

#define AMIGA_INC_STATUS_QUO 1

int main(void)
{
bool Action = 0;
char OpenLetter[16384] = "empty promises";

if(!Action) printf("%s", OpenLetter);
else doSomething("substantive");

return 0;
}

Bill McEwen

(slashies don't survive posting?)

Edited 2007-10-03 07:18 UTC

Reply Score: 7

MORB Member since:
2005-07-06

Oh god, why do you allocate a whopping 16k on the stack for such a short string? Furthermore half of this code is unecessary.

Plus you don't even use that define.

Reply Score: 3

thavith_osn Member since:
2005-07-11

Also, didn't include stdio.h, so the compiler won't do much with printf. doSomething hasn't been defined either...

Not sure about bool sorry, maybe use int?

Maybe the string could have been defined in a const, something like
char OpenLetter[] = "empty promises";

There are a few other problems with the code as well, but lets not get into casting (void) for printf's etc...

so we now have...

#include <stdio.h>

void doSomething(void) {
/*...*/
}

int main(void) {
int action = 0;
char openLetter[] = "empty promises";

if (!action)
(void)printf("%s", openLetter);
else
doSomething("substantive");

return 0;
}

I'm sure there are a lot of other things we can do here too, like use fprintf, include <stdlib.h> perhaps, umm, return SUCCESS instead of 0, maybe (void)main(void) instead? There is also the problem of hardcoding values so code never gets reached - lol...

Seriously, I hope Amiga does go somewhere and they do find a market for it. I'm not sure why so many people here don't like it. I'll stick with OS X personally, and I'm sure most people will stick with their OS of choice, but if Amiga can find a market for DE, then more power to them...

Reply Score: 1

kad77 Member since:
2007-03-20

Oh god, why do you allocate a whopping 16k on the stack for such a short string? Furthermore half of this code is unecessary.


Gee, you think 16k is too much? Really? He had room to say something useful, but didn't. I reduced his letter to two words. Thanks for pointing out that I left him a few thousand extra bytes to say something, I sure didn't notice it ... pure genius.

Plus you don't even use that define.


Missing the humor again you pedantic twat. I used it to make a reference to STATUS QUO. Get a sense of humor, Captain Oblivious.

Edited 2007-10-03 18:16 UTC

Reply Score: 4

MORB Member since:
2005-07-06

Am I missing the humor in your post or are you missing it in mine?

Reply Score: 1

Bill is so funny
by Alleister on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 07:48 UTC
Alleister
Member since:
2006-05-29

If he just communicated when they finished a product, he would have been declared dead by now. It seems more like he communicates whenever he has collected enough hot air.

Reply Score: 3

Why?
by Snake007uk on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 07:58 UTC
Snake007uk
Member since:
2005-07-20

I am not trying to troll or anything, I just want to know why/who would use Amiga OS now?

Considering there are more powerful which support more hardware and have more software support?

I would say the same for Risc OS. I am not arguing that they were ahead of there time blah blah blah, but are they still now ahead of there time? is there hardware cheap? worth buying?

Reply Score: 2

RE: Why?
by PJBonoVox on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 10:13 UTC in reply to "Why?"
PJBonoVox Member since:
2006-08-14

People do still use these OSes out of pure stubbornness and there's no reason to at all. They are the ones that fuel this 'new Amiga' crap that is still going on.

Edited 2007-10-03 10:13

Reply Score: 6

RE[2]: Why?
by Redeeman on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 10:23 UTC in reply to "RE: Why?"
Redeeman Member since:
2006-03-23

Yeah right.. try run linux/bsd/winblows/osx on a 14mhz 68020 and tell me how many hours you have to wait before you can even start a file manager....

not to mention that some of us do have some code for the amiga which have no x86 equivelants..

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Why?
by gfx1 on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 10:45 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Why?"
gfx1 Member since:
2006-01-20

not to mention that some of us do have some code for the amiga which have no x86 equivelants..

Well either start recoding or use winuae or cloanto's stuff. If amiga doesn't come out with something cheap and cool enough to buy then it's not going to happen again.

Accept it, Amiga is dead a thing of the past. It hasn't moved since last century. If you keep hoping you'll get dissappointed again and again. Get over it.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Why?
by neozeed on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 11:25 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Why?"
neozeed Member since:
2006-03-03

where does one even get a 68020 anymore? Esp when I can get a 2Ghz x86 cpu for like $50.

Reply Score: 6

RE[4]: Why?
by Redeeman on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 15:05 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Why?"
Redeeman Member since:
2006-03-23

yet the 68020 still boots faster into a usable user interface than what you have on your 140 times higher clocked x86.....

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Why?
by javiercero1 on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 15:36 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Why?"
javiercero1 Member since:
2005-11-10

"yet the 68020 still boots faster into a usable user interface than what you have on your 140 times higher clocked x86....."

*sigh* So it boots faster, now what?

Your 020 box will take hours to perform some tasks than the Ghz machine can do in minutes/seconds. Under that scheme of things, a few seconds saved in the booting process seem fairly irrelevant really.

But if that floats your boot, by all means enjoy.

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: Why?
by 74k3n on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 16:26 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Why?"
74k3n Member since:
2007-06-06

And my phone boots in ~1 second, point? It's easy to boot quickly when you actually _do_ nothing.

Though i have to admit a lot of modern OS's have been pretty fail on even attempting to bring boot times into a more reasonable time frame. Some have made an effort; Upstart for Ubuntu is getting there and XP boots very quickly.

Other linux distros, Vista and Mac OS X are often quite a lot slower though. Arch linux is incredibly fast but then again that's not down to better technology, it just does less on boot and is more optimized for the architecture than most.

Its silly to compare boot times like that. DOS booted quickly on my 286 too but I'm not going to use that am I?

Edited 2007-10-03 16:36

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Why?
by BluenoseJake on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 18:37 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Why?"
BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

ooohhhh, so I'll be able to enjoy all those modern apps and hardware. What, no PCI-E bus? No AGP? No built in Ethernet? No USB? Perhaps the more modern system takes longer to boot because it has to power up and configure so many different interfaces and buses. Also, it may take longer to do a quick check of 1G of ram compared to say...16M.

You point is moot

Edited 2007-10-03 18:42

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Why?
by billt on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 19:23 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Why?"
billt Member since:
2006-01-04

My AmigaOneXE takes quite a long time to boot up. Part of that is scanning for a bootable CD disk, but I'm not going to change that, since I am likely to need to reboot and restore due to driver development test/debugging. This is a fair comparison IMHO as my PCs are set to boot from CD as well if anything is found there. I would not bet on my AmigaOne with OS4 winning the race with my AMD64 and WinXP. It's been ages since I booted my A4000T with 68060 CPU, I don't recall how long that took.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Why?
by null_pointer_us on Thu 4th Oct 2007 02:29 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Why?"
null_pointer_us Member since:
2005-08-19

The only thing legendary about the Amiga nowadays is the length to which Amiga users will go to try to win an argument about technical merits.

o_0

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Why?
by makfu on Thu 4th Oct 2007 13:47 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Why?"
makfu Member since:
2005-12-18

"yet the 68020 still boots faster into a usable user interface than what you have on your 140 times higher clocked x86....."

Correction: it will boot faster into an interface that was usable in 1991. You would probably have a hell of a time launching, oh, say BioShock for example.

Here is how I roll nowadays: S3 resume - 10 seconds, launch WinUAE - 2 seconds, boot AmigaOS 3.5 10 seconds. And yes, UAE on a modern x86 is faster than any real 680x0 processor. It's also more backwards and forwards compatible than any real Amiga ever was (no using degraders to get program x to run)

But if you really want to talk boot times, a Vic20 boots to a "usable interface" in about 1 second with just 5k of RAM! WOOT! I win!

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: Why?
by viton on Thu 4th Oct 2007 14:53 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Why?"
viton Member since:
2005-08-09

>>Here is how I roll nowadays: S3 resume - 10 seconds
It took ages to boot my vista-book (C2D + 2GB) to the point until it becomes responsible.
And de-hibernation isn't much faster.
On the other hand, my OS3.1 setup can boot in 2 secs under UAE ;)
I can move icons, launch programms in both cases.
What is so special in 2007 vs 1991 desktop?

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: Why?
by Downix on Thu 4th Oct 2007 15:37 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Why?"
Downix Member since:
2007-08-21

> What is so special in 2007 vs 1991 desktop?

I was wondering the same thing. The Amiga's "engine" seems just as modern, infact more modern in some ways than Vista and Linux. But the hardware is too slow, and no, you can't just port it to x86 and expect it to work. There are workarounds, hell Amithlon did it, what, 5 years ago?

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: Why?
by makfu on Thu 4th Oct 2007 15:57 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Why?"
makfu Member since:
2005-12-18

"It took ages to boot my vista-book (C2D + 2GB) to the point until it becomes responsible.
And de-hibernation isn't much faster.
On the other hand, my OS3.1 setup can boot in 2 secs under UAE ;)
I can move icons, launch programms in both cases.
What is so special in 2007 vs 1991 desktop?"


1. I didn't say hibernate resume (S4) I said S3, aka sleep resume.

2. Did you REALLY fail to get my point or are you just trolling? If the latter, lurk moar...

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: Why?
by javiercero1 on Thu 4th Oct 2007 22:18 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Why?"
javiercero1 Member since:
2005-11-10

> What is so special in 2007 vs 1991 desktop?

This little thing called the internet happened...

also people are used to true preemtive and protected multitasking, 4-channel stereo is not really that impressive anymore, neither is 640xwhatever @ 16 colour, people are used to have full motion video, etc, etc, etc, etc....

I loved my Amiga in the context of its hey day: the late 80s. Honestly there has been a lot of water under the bridge ever since.

Reply Score: 0

RE[3]: Why?
by Soulbender on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 13:34 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Why?"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

"try run linux/bsd/winblows/osx on a 14mhz 68020"

Well, it's not 1985 anymore and hardware has actually moved forward since then.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Why?
by biffuz on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 13:46 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Why?"
biffuz Member since:
2006-03-27

Yeah right.. try run linux/bsd/winblows/osx on a 14mhz 68020 and tell me how many hours you have to wait before you can even start a file manager....

Once upon a time, Windows, MacOS, and several Unix flavours did run on 14 MHz processors.

Who wants a 14 MHz personal computer today? I don't.

Edited 2007-10-03 13:46

Reply Score: 4

RE[4]: Why?
by graigsmith on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 15:24 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Why?"
graigsmith Member since:
2006-04-05

are you serious? 14mhz chip? LOLOL even my nintendo DS has a 67 MHz ARM9 chip. what i don't understand is WHY amiga doesn't try to get their os working on common hardware. they always try to get some wierd outdated hardware monstrocity for their os. by the time they get their os working on the ancient wierd hardware, it wont be on the market anymore. They need to just use common x86 hardware just like apple did. i mean, if apple had problems using their own hardware, it must be a nightmare for amiga.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Why?
by apoclypse on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 16:07 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Why?"
apoclypse Member since:
2007-02-17

Apple didn't have any issue with the hardware but more with IBM , which wasn't producing chips as fast as Apple wanted them to. If there is one thing you can say about Intel is that they have the ability to manufacture at a fair cllp.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Why?
by snozzberry on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 17:37 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Why?"
snozzberry Member since:
2005-11-14

Apple didn't have problems using their own hardware. They had problems getting IBM to build a G5 that could do what the Celeron did -- selectively power circuits so that it didn't run so hot as to make laptops impossible.

Intel had been wooing Apple for years, Apple had been developing a parallel version of MacOS for Intel since before Jobs was fired, and when IBM decided that Cell processors were more important than serving Apple, Apple made a switch they were already prepared to do.

This isn't trivial. NT was platform independent (Xbox games were developed on G5 Macs running a PPC build of NT). BeOS was simultaneously written for two platforms with opposing endianness, at the same time Linux was being developed to do the same. Finally, OS X chose the Mach fat binary kernel because NeXT had to run on both 68K Motorolas and Intel CPUs.

Unless Amiga invested the same platform neutrality into their OS design, they're as tied to it as any 1980s chip-burned OS.

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Why?
by leech on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 17:26 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Why?"
leech Member since:
2006-01-10

Well, there's also Lunix, which runs on the Commodore 64 which runs a mighty 6510 @ 1.02 Mhz. Something even Amiga OS cannot do ;)

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Why?
by biffuz on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 22:48 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Why?"
biffuz Member since:
2006-03-27

Really? I've to try it myself :-)
My C64 is in a carton box in the basement, I keep it in working order (well, I chek it when I manage to get it out of there).

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: Why?
by Captain_DaFt on Thu 4th Oct 2007 07:17 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Why?"
Captain_DaFt Member since:
2006-01-01

Here you go, the LNG homepage;
http://lng.sourceforge.net/

And this is helpful for transfering files to and from c64 disks:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/opencbm

Unfortunately, it isn't strictly linux, but Lunix, next generation, a Little Unix designed to run on C64 and C128 architectures.
(Is it even possible to put the Linux kernal in 64k?)

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: Why?
by biffuz on Thu 4th Oct 2007 10:22 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Why?"
biffuz Member since:
2006-03-27

(Is it even possible to put the Linux kernal in 64k?)

I doubt it. You would have to strip away so many things, it wouldn't be Linux anymore. And if you manage to do it, you will be left without enough memory to run anything, making the whole operation useless.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Why?
by madcrow on Thu 4th Oct 2007 22:01 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Why?"
madcrow Member since:
2006-03-13

Don't forget Symbos (http://www.symbos.de/), which provides a full Windows-style GUI on top of a pre-emptive (with priorities) multitasking microkernel GUI on a 3.5 MHz Z80. It ven play video!

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Why?
by CharAznable on Thu 4th Oct 2007 05:57 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Why?"
CharAznable Member since:
2005-07-06

Yeah, and I still have floppies with Mac software written in Pascal from 1986.

But no one's getting necrophiliac on 512k Macs just because they boot faster than OS X on a Mac Pro.

No way any reasonable person is going to give up everything a modern OS gives you just to boot in 10 seconds, especially when you can run a Linux box for 6 months without rebooting.

Amiga maybe could have place in ultraportable laptops or PDA's where that kind of thing is actually important, and where you can give up some of the power a modern desktop OS gives you, but you would need serious companies with serious developers working on it. Not the circus freak show you have now.

Amiga is long dead. Let it go. I let go my beloved Mac OS 7.5 10 years ago. It's going to be OK, I promise.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Why?
by Downix on Thu 4th Oct 2007 12:37 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Why?"
Downix Member since:
2007-08-21

>No way any reasonable person is going to give up everything a modern OS gives you just to boot in 10 seconds, especially when you can run a Linux box for 6 months without rebooting.

Just curious, what features would you be giving up that is integral to the OS? What core feature, not talking apps or the like, the actual OS features themselves.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Why?
by billt on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 19:13 UTC in reply to "RE: Why?"
billt Member since:
2006-01-04

I'm still an Amiga fan. I hope someone finds a way to bring it back to some useful state, even if only as a hobby item. I have Amiga computers, have OS4, but have not used them for nearly 2 years now. I mostly use my iBook with OSX these days at home, but also have 2 WindowsXP boxes and a Linux box. At work I use Solaris and Linux.

I tried to sort out a way to bring OS4 to Apple's PPC hardware, particularly the iBook as I'd love an "Amiga laptop", but Amiga Inc. ignored those license inquiries as well as license inquiries to make a new hardware design, all contacts sent to Amiga's own defined technology licensing email address set up for exactly that purpose. But since getting some laptops at home I found I did not like to be tethered to my office where the Amigas are, and they fell into disuse in favor of computers that could go where I pleased.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Why?
by justin.68 on Thu 4th Oct 2007 11:58 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Why?"
justin.68 Member since:
2006-09-16

PPC hw is practically dead. It'd be a waste of time and money to port an OS to old Apple G3/G4 hw which isn't supported by anyone any longer.

x86 based hw can be cheap enough to revive AmigaOS and it would be made to fly by inexpensive Semprons and Celerons. MicroITX (VIA and Intel) and miniATX solutions would be great.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Why?
by billt on Fri 5th Oct 2007 18:08 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Why?"
billt Member since:
2006-01-04

PPC hw is practically dead. It'd be a waste of time and money to port an OS to old Apple G3/G4 hw which isn't supported by anyone any longer.

I'll take that over zero hardware of any kind. I don't disagree with porting to x86, but if that's not on the table, porting to obsolete PPC Mac hardware only found on Ebay is still better then a total void.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Why?
by justin.68 on Sat 6th Oct 2007 10:57 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Why?"
justin.68 Member since:
2006-09-16

I agree with you that a port too old/unsupported PPC hw is better than nothing. At least that would show AmigaOS isn't defunct and a relic of a glorious past. But would you risk buying an expensive 2ndhand Mac without guarantee? I wouldn't. I don't think it's enough to rely on Mac owners, because most of them have never been interested in Amiga. So x86 is the way to go.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Why?
by Almafeta on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 18:07 UTC in reply to "Why?"
Almafeta Member since:
2007-02-22

Besides nostalgia? People are always on the lookout for a good Windows alternative.

But with most other OSs (Mac included!) tying themselves to the open-source philosophy ("Don't worry about breaking things, it's the user's responsibility to figure out what went wrong and how to fix it, and lecture them about how they are obligated to support 'the community' by giving us all they create while we're pushing this on to them"), there are very few alternatives left; mostly, AmigaOS and SkyOS (plus a dozen or so meant for very niche markets and which aren't quite the same thing as an alternative general OS).

And between AmigaOS and SkyOS, at least pre-ordering SkyOS gives you access to functional, downloadable images of the same system the developers are working on, plus a private forum where you can file bug reports and talk with the developers...

Reply Score: 0

Put up or Shut up.
by IronWolve on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 09:02 UTC
IronWolve
Member since:
2006-01-17

Same shit different day. Always trying to lock it in, never thinking that if they freaking opened up the OS, they could actually make money.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Put up or Shut up.
by Downix on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 14:14 UTC in reply to "Put up or Shut up."
Downix Member since:
2007-08-21

>Same shit different day. Always trying to lock it in, never thinking that if they freaking opened up the OS, they could actually make money.

Agreed 100%. They do not have the time, nor developer resources, to dedicate to anything at this point. If you want your community to do your work for you, as they have shown a desire for in the past, then you have to trust that same community with your very lives, the source code itself.

If AOS did go OSS, I'd imagine that AROS would get a huge boost in development, giving them an actual, sellable product.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Put up or Shut up.
by Almafeta on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 14:34 UTC in reply to "Put up or Shut up."
Almafeta Member since:
2007-02-22

Always trying to lock it in, never thinking that if they freaking opened up the OS, they could actually make money.


Repeat after me: Open source is not a magic cure-all handed down from the gods.

We might also add this axiom: The people who will only use my program if I give it away are not my user base.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Put up or Shut up.
by aliquis on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 14:40 UTC in reply to "RE: Put up or Shut up."
aliquis Member since:
2005-07-23

Atleast it's not a threat for what is dead unusable software and ip anyway.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Put up or Shut up.
by Downix on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 15:20 UTC in reply to "RE: Put up or Shut up."
Downix Member since:
2007-08-21

Open Source is not a magic cure-all, but it would have been in this case.

You forget, in '00, they announced that AmigaOS was dead, discontinued, never to be developed again. The future was AmigaDE, a new OS built on top of Tao.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Put up or Shut up.
by apoclypse on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 15:57 UTC in reply to "RE: Put up or Shut up."
apoclypse Member since:
2007-02-17

i say it is for a small niche market,where mostly hobbiest are involved and are the userbase. it can cure most anything in those cases. Keeping the platform closed means that essentially NOTHING gets released while in an opensource environment at least something gets released even if its not great in the beginning, but the users have the chance to add, tweak, change the source so that scratching their own itch might actually become and scratching those users backs as well. The power of opensource is in the contribution that developers bring to the table. Keeping Amiga closed means nobody contributes and no one benefits at all. I've used AROS and eventhough its a bit rough it looks to have potential and it really only needs a larger community of developers.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Put up or Shut up.
by Minerva on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 18:41 UTC in reply to "RE: Put up or Shut up."
Minerva Member since:
2007-01-26

"Open source is not a magic cure-all handed down from the gods."

No one is arguing that, but still, look at the success of Ubuntu, Red Hat, and other linux distros. The money is in services, not so much in the actual OS these days.

"The people who will only use my program if I give it away are not my user base."

You say that as though there is a userbase for 4.0 to have. Haiku and Syllable are making more progress than that one.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Put up or Shut up.
by CharAznable on Thu 4th Oct 2007 05:59 UTC in reply to "RE: Put up or Shut up."
CharAznable Member since:
2005-07-06

Open source is not a magic wand, but it would prevent exactly what is happening to Amiga: having an entire community at the mercy of incompetent companies and greedy lawyers.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Put up or Shut up.
by billt on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 19:07 UTC in reply to "Put up or Shut up."
billt Member since:
2006-01-04

Same shit different day. Always trying to lock it in, never thinking that if they freaking opened up the OS, they could actually make money.

Please describe how they make money by giving away their one and only product to open source...

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Put up or Shut up.
by billt on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 19:18 UTC in reply to "RE: Put up or Shut up."
billt Member since:
2006-01-04

I do believe that Amiga Inc. should allow the OS4 developers to bring this software to more hardware, any PPC platform, to x86, etc. to unleash the shackles it has to no longer existent hardware (I have that hardware and it works, but no one can buy them anymore). But I don't see any need for it to be open-source. If you want open-source, then use AROS and be happy. But what we really need is license to bring this OS4, proprietary or not, to hardware people can buy and use.

Reply Score: 1

What product..=
by Ringheims Auto on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 09:10 UTC
Ringheims Auto
Member since:
2005-07-23

This path of quietness was chosen so that we communicated only when there was a development that culminated in a product that could be purchased.

Where is the product that can be purchased...?

Reply Score: 5

RE: What product..=
by aliquis on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 11:26 UTC in reply to "What product..="
aliquis Member since:
2005-07-23

Well, you can always buy some:

Egg and bacon
Egg, sausage and bacon
Egg and fud
Egg, bacon and fud
Egg, bacon, sausage and fud
fud, bacon, sausage and fud
fud, egg, fud, fud, bacon and fud
fud, fud, fud, egg, and fud
fud, fud, fud, fud, fud, fud, baked beans, fud, fud, fud and fud
Lobster thermidor aux crevettes with a Mornay sauce garnished with truffle paté, brandy and with a fried egg on top and fud
fud, sausage, fud, fud, fud, bacon, fud, tomato and fud

Reply Score: 7

RE[2]: What product..=
by google_ninja on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 14:19 UTC in reply to "RE: What product..="
google_ninja Member since:
2006-02-05

spam,spam,spam,spam....

you so got a +1 for that one

Reply Score: 3

To sum up...
by PJBonoVox on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 10:11 UTC
PJBonoVox
Member since:
2006-08-14

"Amiga has nothing to release. Amiga is not under offer. Nothing has changed. We're still idiots with no product."

Gee, thanks for the open letter!

Edited 2007-10-03 10:12

Reply Score: 4

2 weeks
by viton on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 10:17 UTC
viton
Member since:
2005-08-09

Amiga has never wavered from the path that was laid out and will deliver on that promise.
We just need 2 more weeks ;)

Reply Score: 10

RE: 2 weeks
by leech on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 17:19 UTC in reply to "2 weeks"
leech Member since:
2006-01-10

I would seriously mod you up a billion points if I could.

This has sadly been the state of Amiga for years. Just two more weeks, two more months. Oh we're almost there. It's like waiting for a Debian release to become stable, except that Debian eventually does release something.

I recall finally being excited that Amiga OS 4 was finished. But then there was no actual hardware to put it on.

I think even GEM and TOS are more or less open source now. At least EmuTOS is around for the latter part, and I think Digital opened up GEM a long time ago, though it wasn't necessarily the Atari GEM.

Amiga Inc. could make a lot of money opening up Amiga OS. Ah, how we all miss the Workbench.

Reply Score: 4

An Open Letter to Bill McEwen
by gleng on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 10:49 UTC
gleng
Member since:
2006-02-16

No one believes you anymore. Oh, and:

"our being quiet has been interpreted as weakness or an open invitation to attempt harming our business relationships and opportunities with partners and customers"

Don't you dare try and blame this mess on anyone other than yourselves.

Reply Score: 6

RE: An Open Letter to Bill McEwen
by aliquis on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 13:34 UTC in reply to "An Open Letter to Bill McEwen"
aliquis Member since:
2005-07-23

Quoted text:
"our being quiet has been interpreted as weakness or an open invitation to attempt harming our business relationships and opportunities with partners and customers"

Don't you dare try and blame this mess on anyone other than yourselves.
End of quoted text.

Yeah, because no progress isn't a weakness!
And oh how bad to tell others nothing is happening over at amiga inc at all and everything is a failure to their potential partners and customers.
The truth hurts!

To bad that Ubuntuguy didn't bought it instead ;D

Reply Score: 1

gleng Member since:
2006-02-16

To be fair to Bill McEwen, I really do blame Amiga Inc's problems on incompetence rather than malice.

Things have just been too f--ked up for far too long. I can't see any possible way out of this mess that's going to happen within this decade.

Reply Score: 1

Over at Amiga, nothing happens.
by aliquis on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 11:18 UTC
aliquis
Member since:
2005-07-23

"This path of quietness was chosen so that we communicated only when there was a development that culminated in a product that could be purchased."

Ah, that explains it, it only means nothing happens at all..

Where is the news? OSfacts?

Reply Score: 1

RE: Over at Amiga, nothing happens.
by billt on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 19:15 UTC in reply to "Over at Amiga, nothing happens."
billt Member since:
2006-01-04

Yea, the path of quietness. Ironic then that this very same Bill McEwen offered to answer "questions fromt eh audience" a few months ago but never followed up on them...
http://www.amigaweb.net/index.php?function=view_news&id=612

I'm curious as to the reason for their quietness since then.

Reply Score: 1

LOOOL
by sandorfal on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 11:24 UTC
sandorfal
Member since:
2006-02-22

As an Amiga fan since beginning and having had "commercial developper" status, I would just want to LOOOOOOOOL, but I feel very sorry about all this...

Reply Score: 1

It's worse than that! It's dead!
by neozeed on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 11:24 UTC
neozeed
Member since:
2006-03-03

I love the fact that I can get the source to Atari TOS... but nothing form commodore assets.

Heck even their SYSV Unix on the 3000 would have been of minior intreset, they could have been something in the unix space, but instead the owners of the Amiga IP have instead chosen to do *nothing*.

How big is their fan base? 17 people?

AROS almost looks interesting but their HDDtoolbox can't even partition a disk without crashing.

Sorry, it seems that if I ever want to play Captain Blood, or SpeedBall2, I'll use UAE of Vista.

Reply Score: 2

Oh my
by ArcadeFX on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 12:03 UTC
ArcadeFX
Member since:
2005-07-06

I do have to admit, this is like a bad horror movie in it's 20th version.

Anyone want to save Amiga? Bueller? Anyone?

Reply Score: 2

sooo
by poundsmack on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 12:29 UTC
poundsmack
Member since:
2005-07-13

"...so we just wanted ot break the sielence and let you all know....we got nothing. but dont worry, THIS is teh decade of the AMiga come back, and if not this decate then surely next decade. That is all" ;)

Reply Score: 2

it's time to move on, guys
by chrish on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 12:33 UTC
chrish
Member since:
2005-07-14

Amiga is the Duke Nukem Forever of hardware?

(Of course, I just got rid of my Atari ST about a year ago... *sigh*)

- chrish

Reply Score: 2

amiga
by nulleight on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 13:10 UTC
nulleight
Member since:
2007-06-22

Their time is running out and they fail to act. I wonder what happens after the generation of people who still have nostalgic memories of amiaga finds something more exiting. How do they plan to make money then? Even sky os has protected memory and its i one of the least known commercial os-es, and if they dont have that in amiga os 4 i wonder how do the plan to survive.

Reply Score: 1

Re: Why
by Downix on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 13:15 UTC
Downix
Member since:
2007-08-21

What does any of this have to do with AmigaOS? He's coming out with hype for Amiga Anywhere, which is based on Tao's OS, which is out of business, so in short, he's selling a product that is not only vaporware, it cannot exist legally at this point.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Re: Why
by aliquis on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 13:30 UTC in reply to "Re: Why"
aliquis Member since:
2005-07-23

If they have paid for the rights to use it why can't it exist longer?

Reply Score: 1

Bore!
by ncorreia on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 14:06 UTC
ncorreia
Member since:
2007-05-01

IMHO the status quo is on the consumer market itself as a whole:

- We've had only three competing major players in the OS arena at least for the last five years, all with comparable strengths
- Apple's rise in popularity and haul to x86, Intel's Centrino and AMD64/EM64T furthered that ISA's stranglehold on the market

So things really aren't very interesting because platforms are stagnated, and I think we're far from a saturated market.

It's a shame companies like Amiga don't move and provide alternative platforms that are interesting, viable, to spice this thing up.

In the early 80s we had dozens of consumer-grade platforms with little to no interoperability or compatibility, but that's no longer a concern nowadays; we really could use more choices.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Bore!
by Jimbo on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 17:58 UTC in reply to "Bore!"
Jimbo Member since:
2005-07-22

So things really aren't very interesting because platforms are stagnated, and I think we're far from a saturated market.


I think you're crazy to say that the x86/x86_64 platform is stagnant. PCI express, SATA, Core2 and other high performance per watt CPUs? Multi-core systems for grandma? Heck we even have physics processing units these days (we have yet to see if they'll ever become successful). Media center PCs, servers in the home... the only stagnant thing I see in this article is Amiga Inc.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Bore!
by stevieu on Thu 4th Oct 2007 11:20 UTC in reply to "Bore!"
stevieu Member since:
2007-10-04

stevieu83 (Me) - Ya know. This video is haunting...(Deathbed Vigil trailer on YouTube)

*shudders*

Well, I shall continue to go through life moaning. The 'failure' of the Amiga is another thing to moan about, along with the crap that goes on in this world.

The whole computer market/it industry is another situation that sums our race up. Blind and devoid! (well, I won't mention names)

Darn.


hazydave (Dave Haynie - Commodore, Chief Engineer) - I read an interview with Bob Dylan; he had an observation.. was a time when you could travel in the USA, and it was like changing countries in Europe. Today the culture is the same.

That's reflected in computing,.. we have PCs, Windows, all the same. Weirdness is tragically ust at the fringe. You can travel to Key West or New Orleans or Austin and get a slice of "something better" today. There are few using something else... but the differences are dramatically less than back in the 80s.

Reply Score: 1

Yawn
by babernat on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 14:07 UTC
babernat
Member since:
2007-02-21

Oh I'm sorry. I wasn't paying attention. I was too busy trying to keep from yawning.

It's usually not a good idea to submit an open letter to your users/developers/possible customers and blame any subset of them for your issues. Doesn't matter whether or not its true, you just don't do it.

Reply Score: 5

Die Amiga Inc., please!
by emersonfxbx on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 16:00 UTC
emersonfxbx
Member since:
2007-03-27

Die, die Amiga Inc, please!!!
Before that, release AOS 4 to us!

Maybe someday we will have Intuition running on our x64 systems...

Reply Score: 1

I've lost what little faith I had left
by Bit_Rapist on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 16:16 UTC
Bit_Rapist
Member since:
2005-11-13

For those of you wanting to point fingers and blame Amiga for the fact that OS 4.0 is not shipping, you are pointing your fingers at the wrong people

It wasn't ME! It was the one armed man!

we explained to the contact at the other company our current valuation based on the last round of funding we had completed, and then gave them the current valuation on the round that is in the process of closing,

Sorry Bill but the *valuation* of a company is not based solely on what cash you have at hand.

You can have 2 billion dollars in hand but without real products generating the revenue to sustain it you haven't got much value and the money ain't going to last long!

As the CEO of Amiga I do hold old Bill responsible. Thats the way it works at every other company I've ever seen that is a *success*.

To me this thing reads like a big ole' pity party and drawn out blame game.

Amiga is finished. I'm convinced now more than ever.

Reply Score: 2

viton Member since:
2005-08-09

>> Sorry Bill but the *valuation* of a company is not
>> based solely on what cash you have at hand.
It doesn't matter because DiscreetFX CAN'T buy Amiga anyway.

Amiga Tech(acquired by Commodore) /B/
Commodore(bankrupt) /D/
Escom(bankrupt) /F/
Gateway(acquired by Acer) /H/
Itec LLC(acquired by KMOS) /J/
KMOS(still alive?) /L/
M-?
The next Amiga owner is mystical "M" company.

Edited 2007-10-03 23:09

Reply Score: 1

viton Member since:
2005-08-09

If we apply "perverse mirror" technique we'll know
the future of KMOS:

acquired
bankrupt
bankrupt
acquired
----------
acquired
bankrupt -> KMOS

Reply Score: 1

RIP
by Oliver on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 16:21 UTC
Oliver
Member since:
2006-07-15

Please let the Amiga die with grace.

Reply Score: 1

RE: RIP
by ebasconp on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 16:42 UTC in reply to "RIP"
ebasconp Member since:
2006-05-09

Let AROS take over the kingdom!

Reply Score: 2

All I want....
by Mage66 on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 16:39 UTC
Mage66
Member since:
2005-07-11

Is a product I can buy.

I would *LOVE* a complete MiniMig with OS 3.9 as a stopgap while new hardware is made.

Or, port OS 4.0 to a MacMini.

Or, buy the PPC Co-Processor Card from Micro-Code Solutions and let me run it on my PC.

But, MAKE A PRODUCT I CAN BUY!!!

I bought the $50.00 coupon to support Amiga, and all I got was a $5.00 t-shirt.

I never got the new computer or OS as promised.

I would buy a decent computer with the name Amiga on it. Just stop all the legal nonsense, and the infighting and the vaporware and get something out there...

Please?

Reply Score: 2

RE: All I want....
by Almafeta on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 17:21 UTC in reply to "All I want...."
Almafeta Member since:
2007-02-22

But, MAKE A PRODUCT I CAN BUY!!!


The thing is, if Amiga Inc. was serious about staying in business, there would be a product out now -- there are PLENTY of affordable, available, already existing solutions, even for PPC hardware. Small form-factor PCs are flooding the market, and there are many below $500 (heck, several are breaking below the $100 barrier).

The amount of work that does not need to be done by Amiga cannot be overstated. Heck, with the money and the rights, I could have these things out by Christmas...

Reply Score: 1

A donation meter!
by Almafeta on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 18:10 UTC
Almafeta
Member since:
2007-02-22

Has anyone else noticed that Amiga Inc.'s official site now has a 'donation meter' to keep the site running from month to month?

That's about how seriously we can take this letter, I fear...

Reply Score: 0

RE: A donation meter!
by Pixie on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 19:36 UTC in reply to "A donation meter!"
Pixie Member since:
2005-09-30

> Has anyone else noticed that Amiga Inc.'s official site
> now has a 'donation meter' to keep the site running
> from month to month?

It ain't an official site, it's a community site. http://amiga.com is the official site. You might also check .com and .org definitions, it might help you in the future on not being so clueless... ;)

Reply Score: 1

gehersh
Member since:
2006-01-03

or software anyone hardly uses? No? Well, let's start another REXX thread then!

Reply Score: 1

The *BIG* news
by pacifier on Thu 4th Oct 2007 09:39 UTC
pacifier
Member since:
2007-10-04

<satire>Bill McEwen announces that he has taken on a new role as spokesman for the Duke Nukem Forever software project. He says that substantial progress has been made, including an internal beta test program, and that it is due for imminent release.</satire>

Reply Score: 2

I feel a song coming on...
by pacifier on Sun 7th Oct 2007 06:34 UTC
pacifier
Member since:
2007-10-04